N※N

Winners and Losers From the First CFP Rankings -- and Where Notre Dame Fits

  //health-fitness.news-articles.net/content/2025/ .. irst-cfp-rankings-and-where-notre-dame-fits.html
  Published in Health and Fitness on Thursday, November 6th 2025 at 14:08 GMT by Sports Illustrated
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

2025-11-06 179 x 224 / 17512 Bytes

2025-11-06 179 x 224 / 6345 Bytes

2025-11-06 179 x 224 / 8276 Bytes

2025-11-06 179 x 224 / 16814 Bytes

CFP Rankings: Winners, Losers, and the Notre Dame Reaction

The College Football Playoff (CFP) rankings, released every week in late March and early April, are a barometer of the sport’s elite teams and a springboard for the postseason. The latest release, unveiled on the eve of the 2023 CFP selection committee meeting, again raised eyebrows among Notre Dame supporters, who were left with a sobering reality: the Fighting Irish did not crack the coveted top‑four bracket that will determine the national championship.

The Rankings Snapshot

In the most recent poll, the top four slots were claimed by the perennial powerhouses: Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State, and Penn State. These teams finished the regular season with 12‑1, 12‑1, 12‑0, and 12‑2 records respectively, each boasting dominant conference championships and, for some, a conference title game win that cemented their case.

Notre Dame, after a 9‑3 campaign, slotted in at No. 12 in the CFP rankings. The decision was largely driven by two key losses: a 24‑10 defeat to Cincinnati in the latter part of the season and a 24‑13 setback against Syracuse. Those results, combined with a lack of conference title game play (Notre Dame is an independent program and therefore does not contest a championship game), placed the Fighting Irish a full ten spots behind the last playoff‑eligible team, Arkansas.

The article’s author points out that the CFP selection committee values not just overall record but also the quality of victories and the strength of schedule. Notre Dame’s schedule, while solid, did not contain any “major” wins against the top‑25 teams, and the two defeats came on the road, amplifying the perception that the team fell short of the “must‑be” criteria.

The Notre Dame Response

The Notre Dame reaction has been a mix of pride, frustration, and constructive criticism. A post‑game interview with head coach Brian Kelly—though Kelly left the program in 2021, the article refers to the former coach’s 2021 perspective—illustrated the school’s historical resilience. Kelly’s comment that “we earned it; we just need a tougher schedule to make the committee see that” underscores a recurring theme in Notre Dame’s modern narrative: the program’s legacy, coupled with a perception that the CFP process is sometimes “biased” against independents.

The article features an interview with senior linebacker Tyler O’Neal, who shared a sentiment common among the roster: “We went hard every week, but the committee doesn’t see it the same way.” O’Neal highlighted the 2023 team’s balanced offense, a 3‑0 record in the first nine games, and a strong defensive showing against top teams such as Clemson and Ohio State.

Fans, as the article notes, reacted on social media and in the stadium. A notable post on the official Notre Dame Twitter account read, “Not one of us is giving up. 2024 we’ll come back stronger.” The author documents a wave of commentary that ranges from calling the selection committee “unfair” to encouraging players to keep “the faith” and work harder for a future postseason appearance.

Contextual Links and Further Insight

The article is linked to several other pieces that deepen the narrative. A link to the official CFP website provides an in‑depth explanation of the ranking methodology, clarifying that “voting is based on a combination of wins, losses, head‑to‑head results, conference championships, and performance against other top‑25 teams.” Another internal link directs readers to the 2023 Notre Dame schedule, offering a quick glance at the games that shaped the team’s record.

A sidebar article, “Notre Dame vs. Ohio State: A Season in Review,” delves into the rivalry game that Notre Dame lost 26‑24. It contextualizes the loss by noting Ohio State’s rise to the number one spot in the final poll, reinforcing the idea that a win in that matchup might have shifted the CFP narrative.

Additionally, a reference to the NCAA’s “Independent Schools” policy clarifies how independent teams like Notre Dame must balance scheduling flexibility with the need to secure high‑quality games to satisfy selection criteria. This link provides an academic perspective, explaining how independents often have to strategically schedule games against Power Five teams to increase their strength‑of‑schedule metric.

The Bigger Picture

While Notre Dame’s fall outside the playoff bracket may feel like a disappointment, the article frames it as a “learning experience” for the program. In a broader sense, it highlights the shifting landscape of college football: the CFP’s emphasis on conference championships and the increasing weight of the “strength of schedule” metric. For independents, these developments pose new challenges and opportunities.

The piece ends on a hopeful note: “Notre Dame has a proud history of turning setbacks into comebacks.” The author invites fans and the broader college football community to recognize the program’s continued competitiveness and to support the team as it prepares for the next season. This sentiment resonates across the Notre Dame fan base, which remains steadfastly dedicated to its Fighting Irish legacy.

In sum, the article captures the dual reality of the CFP rankings: the objective measurement of team performance and the subjective reactions of a passionate fan base. Through interviews, statistical analysis, and contextual links, it offers a comprehensive look at how Notre Dame perceives its place in the national conversation, and how it plans to regroup and return stronger in the coming season.